We analyze downstream courtroom governance in Philadelphia eviction cases using 755,004 Municipal Court landlord--tenant records filed from 1969 through 2022. Post-filing case processing is organized by repeated courtroom relationships, judge and tenant-attorney regimes, reusable agreement templates, and repeated team-property units. Among both-represented, both-attorney-named cases, 58.2% involve a plaintiff-side and tenant-side attorney pair that had appeared against one another in the prior year, and greater prior pair exposure predicts lower default, higher judgment-by-agreement, and higher served-writ rates. Judge-linked cases display statistically distinct baseline outcome, continuance, fee, and award regimes; tenant-attorney identity explains meaningful variance in both case outcomes and agreement terms. Settlement text is highly standardized: reusable templates explain strictness, waiver, lockout-trigger, payment-plan, deadline, and time-is-essence language far more strongly than raw attorney identity. Monetary burden concentrates in repeated plaintiff-attorney-property units. Assignment-cell support and balance audits indicate that judge-linked evidence reflects institutional heterogeneity rather than a clean judge lottery, and judge--triad interactions are not estimable in this docket. Eviction court emerges as a repeated institutional field that organizes bargaining, text, debt, and enforcement after cases enter the courtroom pipeline.

翻译：我们利用1969年至2022年间提交的755,004份费城市政法院房东-租户记录，分析驱逐案件中的下游法庭治理。案件提交后的处理过程由重复的法庭关系、法官与租户代理律师体制、可重复使用的协议模板以及重复的团队-财产单元组织而成。在双方均有代理律师且均已列名的案件中，58.2%涉及原告方与被告方律师配对，且双方曾在过去一年内对抗过；更高的先前配对暴露率预测更低的违约率、更高的协议判决率以及更高的送达令状率。与法官关联的案件显示出统计上显著不同的基线结果、延期、费用及裁决体制；租户代理律师的身份解释了案件结果与协议条款中的显著差异。和解文本高度标准化：可重复使用的模板对严格性、弃权、驱逐触发、付款计划、截止日期及时间至关重要条款的解释力度远强于原始律师身份。金钱负担集中在重复的原告-律师-财产单元中。分配单元支持与平衡审计表明，与法官相关的证据反映了制度异质性，而非干净的法官随机分配，且法官-三方互动在本案卷中无法估计。驱逐法庭显现为一个重复的制度场域，在案件进入法庭流程后组织谈判、文本、债务与执行。